Legacy: Considering the Kennedy-Andropov gambit

posted at 2:22 pm on August 31, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

Now that Ted Kennedy has been eulogized and buried, no one can complain about the examination of his life in the public sphere as inappropriate. From the beginning, Kennedy’s critics have discussed his failures and cowardice at Chappaquiddick, and that certainly belongs in any discussion of Kennedy’s life. However, another episode relates much more directly to Kennedy’s public career and should get a great deal more examination now — his effort to enlist Yuri Andropov as an ally of the Democratic Party against Ronald Reagan in 1983. Peter Robinson reviews the incident for Forbes:

“On 9-10 May of this year,” the May 14 memorandum explained, “Sen. Edward Kennedy’s close friend and trusted confidant [John] Tunney was in Moscow.” (Tunney was Kennedy’s law school roommate and a former Democratic senator from California.) “The senator charged Tunney to convey the following message, through confidential contacts, to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Y. Andropov.”

Kennedy’s message was simple. He proposed an unabashed quid pro quo. Kennedy would lend Andropov a hand in dealing with President Reagan. In return, the Soviet leader would lend the Democratic Party a hand in challenging Reagan in the 1984 presidential election. “The only real potential threats to Reagan are problems of war and peace and Soviet-American relations,” the memorandum stated. “These issues, according to the senator, will without a doubt become the most important of the election campaign.” …

Kennedy’s motives? “Like other rational people,” the memorandum explained, “[Kennedy] is very troubled by the current state of Soviet-American relations.” But that high-minded concern represented only one of Kennedy’s motives.

“Tunney remarked that the senator wants to run for president in 1988,” the memorandum continued. “Kennedy does not discount that during the 1984 campaign, the Democratic Party may officially turn to him to lead the fight against the Republicans and elect their candidate president.”

One might think that the press would take more interest in this subject. Kennedy offered to get Andropov on American television by pushing networks to visit Moscow and give the former KGB chief airtime. Kennedy wanted Andropov to counter Reagan’s assertion that the Soviet Union was an evil empire. Kennedy also wanted Andropov to push for nuclear disarmament, which would have allowed the Soviets to survive much longer than they did against Reagan’s economic warfare.

Even putting aside who the Soviets were, this is a despicable tactic for any American politician. We pride ourselves on our freedom from foreign influences on our elections. Kennedy tried to set up a mechanism for just that influence for partisan gain — and apparently for personal gain as well. Kennedy didn’t run for President in 1988, in any event, but the fact that he relayed his ambitions to a foreign potentate and begged for his assistance should be enough to blacken Kennedy’s political reputation for good, or at least everywhere outside of Massachusetts.

But selling out to the Soviets in such a fashion comes dangerously close to treason. The Soviets weren’t just some other nation a hemisphere away. In the 1980s, they were our mortal enemies, and almost ready to collapse. Kennedy didn’t just offer to allow our enemy to manipulate our elections, but offered to take positive action for them to succeed in that effort.

That’s more than just personal cowardice and betraying the trust of a young woman, resulting in her death. Morally if not legally, the Andropov gambit was a betrayal of American independence and security by a high-ranking politician. It should stand as a singular denunciation of Kennedy as a power-hungry, contemptible politician. Like in Chappaquiddick, the only reason it hasn’t is because of his family name.

Update: Paul Kengor, who wrote about this at length in a 2006 book, gives more background on the memo at The American Thinker:

With Kennedy’s death, this stunning revelation is again making the rounds, especially after Rush Limbaugh flagged it in his “Stack of Stuff.” I’m being inundated with emails, asking basically two questions: 1) is the document legitimate; and 2) what does it allege of Senator Kennedy?

First off, yes, the document is legitimate. If it were not, I would have never reported it. Over the years, from my book to radio and web interviews, I’ve provided specifics. Briefly summarized, here are the basics:

The document was first reported in a February 2, 1992 article in the London Times, titled, “Teddy, the KGB and the top secret file,” by reporter Tim Sebastian. Russian President Boris Yeltsin had opened the Soviet archives. Sebastian discovered the document in the Central Committee archives specifically. When his article appeared in the Times, other on-site researchers dashed to the archives and grabbed their own copy. Those archives have been resealed.

The Times merely quoted the document and ran a tiny photo of its heading. Once I got ahold of it later, I published the entire text (English translation) in my book.

Importantly, when I published the document, Senator Kennedy’s office didn’t dispute its authenticity, instead ambiguously (and briefly) arguing with its “interpretation.” This was clever. The senator’s office didn’t specify whether this interpretation problem was a matter of my personal misunderstanding of the document or the misunderstanding of the document’s author, Chebrikov. Chebrikov couldn’t be reached for comment; he was dead.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

I guess that is a bit harsh since nobody would have died in that accident in a perfect world but I can only imagine what the United States would look like if Kennedy hadn’t had this shadow keeping him out of the White House. How much closer to the current state of chaos would we have dealt with in 1976 had Teddy and not Jimmy won the nomination. For this reason only (and it is no comfort) to see that one accident as a positive for the US.

highhopes on August 31, 2009 at 3:01 PM

Oddly enough, the result may have been effectively the removal of one underminer, though I can’t say what Kennedy might have done worse as president than Carter.

Is this any different than Nancy Pelosi meeting with the Syrian leader ? Various politicans meeting with Saddam ? Obama wanting to talk to the Iranian president ?

The left has always made it clear that enemies of America have good reason to hate America. Therefor if we simply agree with them the problem goes away.

Its a level of stupidity that is rarely rivaled. Anti Americanism is based on envy not on any other factor. Every country has made efforts to support its own POV over others and their claims of innocence ring hollow.

Ed, congratulations for taking on public consideration of Kennedy’s deals with Russia, against the US Presidency during the Cold War. Thjs matter is not revelatory except to newbies who didn’t live through it. That observation clarifies just how long the DNC has owned the press.

One might think that the press would take more interest in this subject.

Once upon a time… long ago… but not when it happened, and most certainly not today. Nope, once JFK was assassinated, LBJ and the media concocted their Kennedy Camelot Myth and no one, not even Teddy, could change the adoration of affect that fairy tale elicited. The press saw to it in conjunction with the Klan.

Why not just quit the overly sympathetic, feigned empathetic, AS IF compassionately open minded phraseology: “One might think that the press would take more interest in this subject”? Taking that tone offends the intelligence of your readers.

More aptly, one might think that THE PRESS has the interest to ignore and hide this subject for their own reason which we all know now is to herald lord Obama. Hail: Obama wiped his ass today, Amen.

But selling out to the Soviets in such a fashion comes dangerously close to treason.

There you go again, couching yourself, Ed, as if you are unsure of yourself, unsure of what Kennedy did, unsure of what treason is. Just call treason treason instead of providing the apologist get-out-of-jail-free-card to Kennedy for simply, possibly, maybe, perhaps flirting dangerously close to treason.

My 18-year-old daughter asked me over the weekend how Teddy boy could’ve stayed in Congress for 50 years with all of the crap he’s done.

I couldn’t answer her.

HAnthonyWayne on August 31, 2009 at 3:20 PM

1. A bottomless pit of personal wealth for buying influence and campaigning.
2. Pork projects for the little piggies in Boston who re-elected him on cue.
3. Spending our money to fund his pork projects.

Tunney was a joke…his father was the fighter, and wanted his kid to be “legitimate”, he lived in So. Cal (Riverside area) his whole life…within months Tunney had the Kennedy New England cadence and “twang” down pat.
He was so phony it was sickening to listen to him speak…all the pauses, and the New England speak….I think his head was filled with chowder.
His millions of dollars spent to get elected, and Tunney did nothing.

Kennedy? Not at all surprised by any of this…Ted lashed out at Reagan at every opportunity, along with most of the Left. After all, Reagan was an out of control old cowboy who didn’t have a clue, remember?

Kennedy wasn’t alone in his back channel “discussions” with any number of Soviets or their Warsaw Pact allies as we moved through the 1980′s.

Conventional wisdom was we had to accommodate the Russkies…because they were so big, and so powerful and Reagan would try to nuke them if we didn’t keep a tight leash on him…and then, they’d nuke all of us. Even among a good number of Republicans at the time this was being passed around from the halls of Congreess to within his own Administration and all through the cocktail cirtcuit in DC and at official US missions abroad.

Had we listened to the prophets of doom then…imagine what the world might be like today? Not all that good, really, just a prolongation of the same old same old “let’s not piss off the Russkies” stuff. And many of us have seen, and read, the former Soviet documents that showed how accommodating a great many of our elected officials were towards the Russians for decades and decades.

We might also ponder the kind of ethically and morally challenged no-talents that America’s “top” law schools accept and/or produce. I’m sure you’ve all noticed that almost without exception that behind every reprehensible political and social behavior lurks a lawyer…or two..or three…

Then, now, MSM, independent, no matter. All media outlets have their powers that be potentates who decide what will be banned from their own countenance using their power to publicize or to ignore/boycott.

Instead of Texas or someone else seceding from the union, can we push someone (MA) out?

cjs1943 on August 31, 2009 at 3:36 PM

As I sit here in MA and read all the justifiable comments and questions wondering how Kennedy could have been re-elected, the only explanation I can come up with is to say that the “mental disorder” of blind liberalism is wide and deep here – they are in the majority by far, but there are some “right thinkers” here too. I blame it partly on the socialist/leftist professors at the many universities we have here. Kenedy was much beloved by those for whom he did favors and brought home the bacon. I apologize to you all for the billions you had to give to the “Big Dig’ project, but all I can do is invite you here to enjoy the city – it really is beautiful and lots to see. AND we are not all insane, and generally even the insane ones are pretty nice, if you don’t talk politics. That said, we can’t wait to get out of the state.

No doubt that he was a vile, treasonous SOB. However despicable it is to betray your country for personal gain, it doesn’t even come close to being directly responsible for the death of another human being. I love my country and all, but purposefully extinguishing a human life has got to outrank treason.

After Mary Jo nothing surprises. It takes an incredible dirt bag, human excrement to be more exact, to leave her in the car.

Combine this Russian episode with the 1990 Michael Kelly expose of Kennedy and Dodd, the authors of which were never sued, and you have in essence the poster children of evil politicians. Worse still, they are fawned over by the press.

In the end the only thing equal to these appalling truths is the fact that the electorate with full knowledge elects these people to this very day. It’s not a stretch to think we are f’ked. We have become so jaded that nothing shocks us.

Nice try, but no cigar. You are correct about the overwhelming elite snotty academic attitude. However, it bleeds over into business community and treatment of others. It is a very cold, unfriendly, me 1st attitude in every aspect of live in Taxachusetts. RI and Ct are no better.

My 18-year-old daughter asked me over the weekend how Teddy boy could’ve stayed in Congress for 50 years with all of the crap he’s done.

I asked a slightly-less-lefty-than-usual Massachusetts liberal that question. He said Kennedy and Kerry accrued more and more seniority and were able to bring home better and better pork. Same story with Murtha, who even blatantly insulted his constituents by calling them racists, and they voted him back in anyway,

Why the surprise Master chief? Kennedy’s ideology was always openly hostile to the service. That they ran a shadow foreign policy hostile to the nation is not that big a leap.

elduende on August 31, 2009 at 3:03 PM

Well … I’m not really surprised. But I am pretty pissed off about this. As I stated, I was underway a lot back then and missed a lot that was happening. In fact – I’m still catching up on all the stuff that happened that I missed then.

I missed this … I didn’t know about this.

And the press and Democrats allowed this bastards to serve after finding out about this?

Nixon covered up a freaking botched break-in for crying out loud. He never did anything remotely close to this treasonous stuff.

To this day, in Leftist/Democrat “sophisticated” circles, the mockery of the Right/Conservatives for being concerned re the Cold War and the growth of Communism is a badge of honor. The REgressive Left has more in common with Communism than they admit.

Re the Soviet memo: Look who Ted Kennedy was offering in the media to promote Andropov’s message– Walter Cronkite and Barbara Walters. Granted, they were big poobahs in network television, but their sympathies were always with the Left. They served as useful idiots for too many years. Walters continues to do so, and she serves as Grande Dame on “The View,” the indoctrination entertainment of empty-headed women in America.

Teddy’s “accident” happened too close on the heels of JFK’s assassination–I know, six years–but the nation was fed the narrative of the Kennedy curse. In self-protection over the multiple shocks and the building anti-war furor/riots, people were hiding from hard truths out of self-protection from further assaults.

Has anyone considered what must have gone through Kennedy’s mind in the last days of his life?

If, as it has been repeatedly said, he was a truly religious person he must have been dreading his impending conversation with St. Peter.

Abortion, Sara Jane, and several violations of the 10 Commandments all came down on the negative side of the ledger. The few things that would show up on the positive side were mainly secular and of little interest to the Holy Host.

….but the fact that he relayed his ambitions to a foreign potentate and begged for his assistance should be enough to blacken Kennedy’s political reputation for good, or at least everywhere outside of Massachusetts.

If the document were planted by the KGB and/or was not accurate, I would expect Kennedy to have disputed its contents when it was first published by Paul Kengor in his book The Crusader, in 2006. Instead, when the document was published, “Senator Kennedy’s office didn’t dispute its authenticity, instead ambiguously (and briefly) arguing with its “interpretation.” Based on that, I think the document is exactly what it appears to be.

Editorials/Op-Ed
Cold War contacts
TODAY’S COLUMNIST
By John Smith
John Smith
February 8, 2007
In 1983, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy offered to help the Soviets mount a public-relations offensive in the
United States. This propaganda attack would target President Reagan and his policies. These are the
same policies that eventually ended the Cold War and reduced the possibility of nuclear annihilation.
This charge was made by Paul Kengor in his book “The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of
Communism.”
This new book adds to research done by Herb Romerstein, Yevgenia Albats, Vladimir Bukovsky,
Pavel Stroilov and others. They all indicate that Mr. Kennedy felt that any bad relations between the
United States and the Soviet Union were the sole fault of Mr. Reagan and that talk of a Soviet military
threat was nonsense. These articles seem to validate reports that were first published by Vasili Mitrokhin
— the former KGB historian who secretly copied sensitive KGB files and released them after the fall of
the Soviet Union.
According to this research and released KGB papers, Mr. Kennedy felt that the booming economy
during Mr. Reagan’s presidency made him popular — and thus a difficult target for Democratic
criticism. Because of this, Mr. Kennedy reportedly felt that Mr. Reagan’s only weakness was in foreign
policy. Here, the articles say Mr. Kennedy felt the Soviets might be of assistance, if Mr. Kennedy and
the Democrats could get the ear of the general-secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.
Numerous articles also saidthatthisanti-Reagan/anti-U.S. conspiracy was not a one-man operation by
Mr. Kennedy. They indicate that former Sen. John V. Tunney, a California Democrat, went to Moscow
and met with officials of the KGB on Mr. Kennedy’s behalf. Additionally, in their book “The Sword
And The Shield,” Christopher Andrew and Vasili Metrokhin said that as early as 1975 the KGB began
operations to penetrate the inner circles of a number of leading Democrats, including the likes of Mr.
Kennedy and Ramsey Clark. They also mentioned that a Democratic Party activist had been recruited by
the KGB and had supplied the Soviets with information from a variety of Democratic leaders, including
President Carter.
Speaking of Jimmy Carter, according to John Burtis of the Canada Free Press, Mr. Kennedy also
worked against Mr. Carter in 1979. Mr. Burtis reported that Mr. Kennedy offered to help Moscow when
Mr. Carter harshly criticized the Soviets for their invasion of Afghanistan. According to Charles Dunn,
the dean of the Robertson School of Government at Regent University, these types of subversive
activities were in “clear violation of the U.S. Constitution and at the expense of presidential authority.”
Here the question arises, are these accusations true? Would a U.S. senator, the brother of a beloved
U.S. president, conspire with the Soviets against his own country? The works by Messrs. Metrokhin,
Kengor and Romerstein, and others seem to lend credence to the charges if they don’t actually confirm
them.
In considering all this information, it is necessary to understand how the USSR and the KGB
operated during the Cold War. The Soviet KGB (i.e. the Secret Police) was nothing if not thorough.
Visitors to Moscow, especially important visitors, could count on total and constant surveillance, both
audio and video. Total surveillance would include meetings, private conversations, bedrooms and even
bathrooms. The Soviets were also masters in using any information that was acquired to manipulate or
even blackmail the victim. So, like perversion of the Miranda rights statement, anything anyone said or
did in Moscow could be and often was used against them — but not in a court of law.
Cold War contacts – Editorials/Op-Ed – The Washington Times, America’s Newspaper Page 1 of 2http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20070207-090506-1276r.htm 2/8/2007
Reportedly, after Mr. Reagan left office, Mr. Tunney said that he had indeed contacted the Soviets on
behalf of several U.S. senators — not just Mr. Kennedy. So, the question is, did some of the Democratic
Party leadership offer to work with the Soviet KGB against Mr. Reagan? If so, were they later
blackmailed into working for the KGB and against the United States on other fronts? How many
Democratic politicians were compromised and later blackmailed? Lastly, if they were controlled by the
Soviets, are they now “influenced” by the Russians? Inquiring minds want to know.
Any foreign influence over U.S. politicians could have drastic consequences in the politically charged
atmosphere seen in today’s Washington.
The bottom line is that if there is any shred of truth in these documented stories, the senator from
Massachusetts, as well as any other compromised politicians, should resign or be kicked out of the
Senate or Congress.

What is the name of that pesky law about our elected officials not being engaged in the affairs of some other country’s government?
HMMMMMMMM…..
Don’t help me. I know what it’s called.
Oh, now I remember. It’s the Hatch Act. When Obooboo went to Kenya on my money and campaigned for his cousin/uncle whatever and when SanFranNan went to Syria to play around and way back in the cold war when Teddy was feeling some commie luv, they were breaking the law.

Truth be told I am not surprised that Kennedy would have indulged in something like this, on the personal level. It speaks of his lack of values of any kind, his Soviet sympathies, and the depth of his opposition to the Republicans in general and Reagan in particular.

Still I am shocked he did this as a United States Senator. As a elected representative of the American people this man actually had the gall to invite a foreign power, our mortal enemy, to meddle in the Republic’s internal affairs? I shouldn’t be surprised, he was a Kennedy after all, but still. Thank the Lord he did not succeed, and Reagan brought about the collapse of the Soviet Union. The fall of the evil empire was long overdue.

One day Yuri Andropov was standing at Lenin’s Tomb at sunrise. As the sun peeked over the horizon it boomed out a warm greeting, “Good morning, Comrade Chairman! Death to Capitalists!”. The hours passed by as Yuri feverishly did all in his power to undermine the imperialist Americans. Finally, he got a request from US(eful idiot) Senator Ted Kennedy to assist him overthrowing Pres Ronald Reagan and so Chairman Andropov thought he’d finally earned a break from his labors. He stepped onto his office balcony and saw the sun setting. Furious, he bellowed at the sun, “I am leader of greatest socialist nation the earth has ever seen. Why do you not wish me a goodnight, you lickspittle?” The sun replied, “Screw you! I’m in the West now!”

Ed, perhaps you ought to consider something that both you and Forbes did not address and may have missed. TK’s apparent assurance that he could get Andropov on US media suggests that the US media were already pretty much in the pockets of the radical (Communist) wing of the Democratic party, doesn’t it?